Brumidi Art in the United States Capitol
Brumidi’s art in the Capitol Building is not all accessible to the casual visitor. The large mural already mentioned which the old master executed on the wall of the House of Representatives Chamber can be viewed by visitors only from the galleries of the House, unless some special dispensation takes the visitor to the Floor of the House of Representatives for a close-up study. The beautiful frescoes on the walls and ceilings of six committee rooms, one in the House extension and five in the Senate extension, can be seen only by special permission or by attendance at certain committee hearings.
House of Representatives Committee Room
The frescoes in the House of Representatives Committee room, originally occupied at the time of execution by the Committee on Agriculture, were finished in 1855. This room displays two large crescent-shaped wall frescoes, referred to as “lunettes” by Brumidi—“The Calling of Cincinnatus from the Plow”, and “The Calling of Putnam from the Plow to the Revolution.” Two portrait heads in imitation sculpture adorn the other two walls of this room. Beneath the marble-like medallion head of Washington is a choice panel showing an American harvest scene of early date, while beneath the medallion head of Jefferson on the opposite wall is what was then a modern threshing scene, a golden field of grain being harvested by the new McCormick Reaper. The ceiling is light and gay and exquisite with designs representing Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter. The blues and golds and inimitable flesh tints of the entire room seem not to have faded one whit during the ninety years they have spread cheer and beauty about an otherwise sombre corner of the House extension of the Capitol.
In spite of all the beauty Brumidi painted into the old Capitol Building the Congressional Journal for those Brumidi years records occasional reference on the Floor of the House, criticizing the Italian artist and his work. In 1858 Congressman Lovejoy ridiculed in the House Chamber that “brilliant interpretation of the seasons” by Brumidi in his first frescoed ceiling decorated for the use of the House Agriculture Committee. Said Mr. Lovejoy in his Congressional speech,
“Overhead we have pictures of Bacchus, Ceres, and so on, surrounded with cupids, cherubs, etc., to the end of heathen mythology. All this we have; but not a single specimen of the valuable breeds of cattle, horses, sheep, etc., which are now found in this country. In another panel, we have a company of harvesters with the sickle, which is well enough, only a quarter of a century too late. But worst of all, there is not a single picture to represent maize. A panel ought to have been given to this single production. It should have been represented in its different stages; as it emerges, weak and diminutive, from the ground, as it sways in its dark luxuriance of June and July; and then as it waves its tasseled crest, like the plumes of an armed host; and last as it stands in its rich golden maturity.”
We find Brumidi’s art defended, however, on the Floor of the House of Representatives about two years later, on June 15, 1860, by Mr. Curtis of Pennsylvania. Said Mr. Curtis,
“If you go into these committee rooms, and these galleries, of which we have heard so much, and take any honorable and fair-minded artist with you, he will himself do justice to the specimens of art that will be before him, and admit its distinguished worth. What, sir, can be more beautiful than the fresco work in the room of the Agricultural Committee?”
Hanging on the side of a bookcase today, in this House Committee Room, where Brumidi began his Capitol decorations, is a framed bit of verse put on display evidently by an admirer of the artist. This attempt to give poetic expression to the worth of Brumidi and his art was written by Horace C. Carlisle, a present employee of the Architect’s office of the Capitol. Seven such pieces of verse on Brumidi and his art, written by Mr. Carlisle, were placed in the Congressional Record by Congressman Sheppard of California, on April 7, 1944. The verses themselves are irregular but one line in the frame beneath Brumidi’s first American fresco is an immortal prophecy. Said Mr. Carlisle, concerning Brumidi and that first fresco in the Capitol Building:
“Above the rebuke of the scorner he climbed to glory height there.”
In 1874 Brumidi himself referred to his first American fresco in a statement, “Relative to his employment at the Capitol,” which is now preserved in the Architect’s office. Said Brumidi, in part,
“The Committee Room on Agriculture in the south wing of the Capitol was painted in 1855 as the first specimen of real fresco introduced in America.
“In this connection can be mentioned a curious mistake common in this country, and that is the calling all and every decoration in oil, turpentine or glue that is put upon dry walls, real fresco.
“Fresco derives its name from fresh mortar, and is the immediate and rapid application of mineral colors diluted in water, to the fresh mortar just put upon the wall, thereby the colors are absorbed by the mortar during its freshness, and repeating this process in sections day by day, till the entire picture will be completed.
“This superior method is much admired in the celebrated works of the old masters, and is proper for historical subjects or classical ornamentations, like the Loggia of Raphael at the Vatican.”
House of Representatives Chamber
A most revealing side light on the Cornwallis-Washington mural on the south wall of the House of Representatives Chamber, earlier referred to, is brought forth by an anonymous letter written on December 14,
1857, to Captain Montgomery C. Meigs, Superintendent of Construction, two days before the House met in its new “Hall of the House of Representatives.” The letter protesting this contract follows:
“Dear Sir:
It will be news to you, I dare say, to learn that there is a party organizing to effect your removal from the Superintendent of the Capitol extension and I take leave to say to you that the wall painting, ‘The Surrender of Cornwallis,’ is considered inappropriate and the execution execrable, in view of all of which I suggest to you to have the painting wiped out.
Your friend and supporter,
Officious”
Since Captain Meigs could not reply directly to “Officious” he gave vent to his feelings by penning a note on the above letter. This note gives among other things an idea of the speed with which Brumidi was able to work under pressure. The note follows:
“One of many indications. The picture is as good as could be painted in six weeks. It serves to show what the effect of painting on the panels will be which is all I intended. It cost little and I have not the least objections to a better painting being by Congress put over it, but it is the best that could be done at the time and no more time was at my immediate disposal.
M. C. M.”
In 1859 a Congressional Committee voiced a criticism which undoubtedly refers also to the Cornwallis-Washington painting in the House Chamber. They said,
“Far greater sobriety should be given to these Halls in their general effect, so as to render them less distracting to the eye. Few are aware how disturbing to thought the display of gaudy, inharmonious colors can be made. This very quality renders such combination of colors unsuited to halls of deliberation where calm thought and unimpassioned reason are supposed to reside.”
Mr. Curtis of Pennsylvania rose again in the House of Representatives on June 15, 1860, in defense of Brumidi’s art but with special reference to the House fresco. Said he,
“I have heard with some regret appeals made to the prejudices of the country in regard to the specimens of art taste displayed about this Capitol; and I have been surprised that no one connected with this Branch of service has risen upon the Floor to do justice to those who have devoted their lives and energies to the embellishment of our public buildings. What is more splendid than the fresco in some of the halls and passages around the Senate Chamber and especially the emblem of Religion in the President’s
Room? And in this Hall, where do you find room to criticize the combination of colors which you see around you? It is easy to invent a popular criticism and find fault; but I would like to see some of these gentlemen who are so conversant with matters of taste and art as to speak with the assurance of masters, bring forward some design, some specimen from their superior genius that they would themselves insert in place of that which they see around them.”
President’s Room
The decoration of the President’s Room in the Senate Annex is thought by many to be Brumidi’s best work in the Capitol Building. Since the President’s Room in the Capitol was to be set aside for the use of the President of the United States at any time duty called the President to the Capitol Building, it may well be supposed that Brumidi wanted that room to be as beautiful as an artist could make it. He is said to have spent more than five years on this room alone, but five years seem not half long enough to create such beauty as is here displayed.
Five colorful ceiling-to-floor panels adorn the walls and in the center of each hangs a portrait elegantly framed. The five members of Washington’s first Cabinet are thus honored—Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, Secretary of State; Edmund Randolph of Virginia, Attorney General; Henry Knox of Massachusetts, Secretary of War; Alexander Hamilton of New York, Secretary of the Treasury; and Samuel Osgood of Massachusetts, Postmaster General. I say these portraits hang in the panels. If you stood at the door looking hurriedly about the walls, as most visitors must do at the President’s Room, you would think the frames as real as the portraits. In truth, though, the beautifully carved frames are painted on the walls as are the portraits. Mr. Fairman calls these paintings, “Portraits of Distinction,” and so they are.
But it is the frescoed ceiling in the President’s Room that showers new light and color and added beauty about the portraits on the walls. Four symbolic groups on this ceiling look down from their large medallion gold leaf frames—four life-size Madonnas, symbolizing Religion, Legislation, Liberty, and Executive Authority—Madonnas of great beauty and rare coloring. Then at each corner of this frescoed ceiling among the symbolism and the cherubs are four life-size portraits, full length, each chosen as representative of a force in civilization. Columbus memorializes discovery; Vespucius, exploration; Brewster, religion; and Franklin, history.
The portrait of George Washington, evidently done with Rembrandt Peale’s Washington in mind, has a position all its own high above the portrait of Thomas Jefferson. A portion of the Annual Report of Captain Meigs, dated October 27, 1859, fixed the completion of the Brumidi frescoes in the President’s Room. Said that report, “The painting of the President’s Room in the North wing will be completed by the next meeting of Congress.”
Even during the years that Brumidi created the beauty of the President’s Room cruel words were hurled against his art. In 1858 a convention of self-styled American artists assembled and drew up an estimate of their own worth which they titled: “Memorial of the Artists of the United States.” This petition of grievance presented to the Congress of the United States carried the names of 127 individuals, chiefly from New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore with only eight from the Capital City. Among the signatures were found the names of Rembrandt Peale, W. D. Washington and Johannes A. Oertel, the latter being the draughtsman who challenged Brumidi’s right, in 1858, to paint the ceiling fresco in the District of Columbia Committee Room of the Senate.
It is illuminating to know that 88 of the 127 names listed as artists in the above Memorial do not even appear in the National Encyclopedia of American Biography while among those that do appear, less than a dozen are recognized today as artists of note.
The Artists’ Memorial began with these words, “Your memorialists appear before your honorable bodies to solicit for American art that consideration and encouragement to which they conceive it to be entitled at the hands of the general government.” Then the Memorial asked that Congress “establish an Art Commission composed of those designated by the united voice of American artists as competent to the office, who shall be accepted as the exponents of the authority and influence of American art, who shall be the channels for the distribution of all appropriations to be made by Congress for art purposes, and who shall secure to artists an intelligent and unbiased adjudication upon the designs they may present for the embellishment of our National buildings.”
The House of Representatives referred the Artists’ Memorial to a select committee of five. This Committee brought out Report No. 198, March 3, 1859. That Report not only sanctioned the establishment of the suggested Art Commission to protect the “embellishment of National buildings” but it voiced criticism by the Congressmen making up the select Committee of five. Brumidi’s name was not mentioned in the Report but there is no mistaking the artist to whom they referred. Said the Committee in this Report:
“A plain coat or two of whitewash is better, in the opinion of this committee, for a temporary finish than the tawdry and exuberant ornamentation with which many of the rooms and passages are being crowded.... An eagle and the National flag may be discovered occasionally amidst the confusion of scroll work and mythological figures presented to the eye; but the presence of conventional gods and goddesses, with meaningless scrolls and arabesques, albeit they may be wrapped in the red, white and blue, will never suggest to the American, as he wanders among the halls and committee rooms, any idea to touch his heart or to inspire his patriotism.... Should he seek an explanation from those who are manufacturing the cumbrous levities which everywhere appear through the building he will be eminently fortunate should he find among them one who speaks the English language.”
The real fight of the petitioners was evidently against the employment of a foreign artist. However, this was not expressed openly in the Memorial but the select committee of five from the House of Representatives made the open accusation. Said they in their Report, “The Committee have not been informed that American artists have been engaged upon the embellishment of the Capitol, but they have been made painfully conscious that the work has been prosecuted by foreign workmen under the immediate supervision of a foreigner. As a consequence the Committee find nothing in the design and execution of the ornamental work of the Capitol, thus far, which represents our own country, or the genius and taste of her artists.”
This unjust criticism of Brumidi found expression in the New York Daily Tribune for May 17, 1858, through that paper’s Washington correspondent. The New York attack on the artist, however, was answered in the Tribune for May 31, 1858, by Guglielmo Gajani, a friend of Brumidi’s. Extracts of this defense of Brumidi follow:
To the Editor of the New York Tribune:
I have lately been at Washington and derived much pleasure from visiting the National Capital and its splendid buildings and works of art. I admired them and was much pleased with the frescoes and decorations of my fellow citizen Signor Constantino Brumidi. But on my return to New York my attention was directed to a correspondence of the Tribune (May 17) and to other attacks made against that artist and his works at the Capitol.
I knew him in Rome, where he was much esteemed and has left excellent specimens of his artistic skill. I can hardly believe that ten years of exile could have so entirely destroyed his capacity or impaired my judgment. Had the attack been confined to the ground that artists or workmen of foreign birth who are satisfied with a small compensation should be excluded from the Capitol in order to have the work done exclusively by natives well paid, I would have nothing to say for I keep off entirely from your administrative questions and politics. But on the ground of art and taste a Roman might be allowed to express an opinion quite different from that of your own correspondent and his friends.
Fresco painting represents in art what improvisation is in poetry. The artist must execute his work upon a fresh wall, tracing the outlines by a steel point and using mineral colors which are instantly absorbed and do not show their effect until the wall dries. The artist, therefore, must work with great rapidity and has no opportunity for corrections. It does not require a greater capacity than the ordinary painting with oil or water colors on a dry wall, but the artist must have a peculiar disposition, and this the Italian possesses to a greater degree than others.
Michelangelo had never practiced fresco painting when Bramante procured him the commission to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel with a view to ruin his reputation. Michelangelo called from Florence his former schoolmate, Granacci, and other fresco painters, to teach him the art. He was much perplexed at the beginning but afterward declared it the best style of painting. I believe that your best painters, by exerting themselves and gaining experience, might have succeeded in doing the work accomplished by Brumidi, but it would have required a long time and an enormous expenditure.
It is a fact that in France, in England, in Belgium, in Italy and everywhere public buildings have been decorated by competent artists, you meet the same style and symbols, allegories and classical memories occasionally adopted by Signor Brumidi. Before condemning him you must find fault with all the best painters who preceded him, and especially with Michelangelo and Raphael who
introduced that style of fresco in the Vatican itself.... It is absurd, therefore, to despise the works of Signor Brumidi because “they look foreign and betray the Italian element,” that is to say, because they are classical in the subject and artistic in the execution.
I confess that my national feelings were a little wounded when I saw vituperated to some extent in Washington an artist much esteemed in Rome. Music and the fine arts are all that remain of our former greatness, and we are naturally jealous of this glory. Besides, I am convinced that Signor Brumidi is a good artist and an excellent fresco painter. He has studied long in Rome, even from his boyhood, and visited for instruction all the most important schools of art in Italy. Baron Camucini was his master in painting, and the great Thorwaldsen taught him sculpture. In both arts Signor Brumidi has left several specimens of his skill in Rome. For instance, he was employed during eleven years in making frescoes and decorations of the villa and of the palace of Prince Torlonia in Rome. These works are admired by visitors. Should an American admire the works of Signor Brumidi at home and despise them when he finds them at Washington?
Signor Brumidi was also employed by the Government in Rome, together with other distinguished artists, to prepare the chronology of the Popes, in the new Basilica of St. Paul, and was allowed to finish his work after the revolution, notwithstanding that he was persecuted for the part which he took in that movement. The Republican Government of Rome honored Signor Brumidi with an important commission as he was much esteemed for his talent and personal qualities. I am glad, myself, that he has already executed some works at the Capitol. They speak for themselves to those who have taste for the fine arts.
Guglielmo Gajani
In the Architect’s Report for 1859 we find this reference to the detrimental influence of the Artist’s Memorial:
“The action of Congress in restricting the expenditure for painting and sculpture to the completion of the painting of rooms in the North Wing already partly done... and to such paintings and sculpture as shall have been approved, first, by a committee of three American artists, to be appointed by the President and then by the Library Committee of Congress, has prevented the commencement of any new works.”
It seems certain, however, that Brumidi was not often continuously employed on any one picture. As shown by his vouchers, if work was held up in one direction he could easily employ himself in another. For example, he began work in the Senate Library in 1858 and the Architect of the Capitol records the finish of the Senate Library ceiling in 1875. But during those years the 4,664 square feet of fresco in the Canopy of the Dome was finished as well as the President’s Room and many committee room frescoes and hall decorations in the Senate Annex. References in Reports and letters usually give the finishing date of the fresco while the beginning date is seldom mentioned.
Capitol Dome
The huge fresco on the canopy of the Dome of the Capitol Building is signed “C. Brumidi, 1865.” In the Annual Report dated November 1, 1863, of Thomas Walter, Architect of the Capitol (1851-1865), we find this reference to the Dome canopy:
“The cartoons for the picture on the canopy over the eye of the inner dome are being prepared, and its execution will be commenced as soon as the iron work which is to receive it can be put in place.”
Certain letters in the National Archives between Brumidi and United States officials shed interesting light on the 1862 negotiations relative to the Dome Canopy. Extracts from these letters follow:
From Tho. U. Walter, “architect of extension and new Dome,” to Constantino Brumidi, August 18, 1862: “It is intended to have a picture 65 ft. in diameter painted in fresco on the concave canopy over the eye of the New Dome. I would thank you to furnish me with a design for the said picture at your earliest convenience.... You will also submit with the design an estimate of the cost of executing it in real fresco painted on the fresh mortar.”
From Constantino Brumidi to Tho. U. Walter, September 8, 1862. “...I herewith submit to you my design for the fresco picture to be painted on the Canopy of the New Dome of the United States Capitol. The six groups around the border represent, as you will see, War, Science, Navigation, Commerce, Manufacture and Agriculture. The leading figures will measure some 15 feet. In the center is an apotheosis of Washington surrounded by allegorical figures of eminent men of the times of Washington, which latter will be likenesses.
“As this picture will be seen at a height of 180 ft. the painting must be of the most decided character possible. It will cover 4664 sq. ft. and will be worth $50,000 to execute it including the necessary cartoons and every expense pertaining to the painting.”
From Tho. U. Walter to Constantino Brumidi, December 24, 1862. “Your letter of the 8th of September was duly received, together with your design for the proposed picture in fresco, for the canopy over the eye of the New Dome of the United States Capitol. The design meets my entire approval. It has also the approval of Major B. B. French, the Commissioner of Public Buildings. I sent it to the residence of the Hon. Caleb B. Smith, the Secretary of the Interior, where it has been for several weeks. Mr. Smith also expresses himself entirely satisfied with the design. I am therefore free to give it my official approval with but one condition and that is that you will consent to execute it at a greatly reduced cost.
“I am aware, as you have expressed to me in conversation that there is no picture in the world that will compare with this in magnitude and in difficulty of execution, being painted on a concave surface, and I am also aware that it covers about eight times more surface than Mr. Lentze’s picture which cost $20,000. But in view of the exigencies of the times I do not consider that we would be justified in expending so large a sum as $50,000.
“Should you execute this work it will be the great work of your life: it will therefore be worth on your part some sacrifice to accomplish so great an achievement....”
From Constantino Brumidi to Tho. U. Walter, December 27, 1862: “...I have come to the conclusion to expedite a settlement as to the price of the painting to be executed on the canopy over the eye of the Dome of the United States Capitol by reducing my offer to $40,000, which is lower, considering the subject, the curved form of the surface on which it is to be painted and the square feet of painting it contains than any real fresco picture ever painted....”
From Tho. U. Walter to B. B. French, “Distributing Agent of United States Capitol,” December 29, 1862: “...I consider the price ($40,000) exceedingly low in view of the fact that it contains 4664 square feet, that it is all to be painted on a curved surface, and that Mr. Brumidi is the only real fresco painter in this country capable of executing the work. The design is probably the grandest and most imposing that has ever been executed in the world and Mr. Brumidi has proved by his real frescoes in the Capitol extension (all of which were painted by his own hand) that he is fully equal to the task. The grandeur of this picture, the great distance at which it will be seen, and the peculiarity of its light will render it intensely imposing.”
From B. B. French to Tho. U. Walter, January 5, 1863: “...as there is confessedly no artist in the United States, capable of executing a real fresco painting as it should be done, especially so important a work as the one in contemplation, except Mr. Brumidi, and, as we know from experience his excellence in that art, I do not see how we can do otherwise than employ him....”
From Tho. U. Walter to Constantino Brumidi, March 11, 1863. “...I have the honor to inform you that your design for painting the Canopy over the eye of the aforesaid new Dome is adopted. And, inasmuch as Congress has made the appropriation for the completion of that work you are hereby authorized to proceed at once with the aforesaid canopy painting....”
Two letters, one from the Department of the Interior to the Capitol Dispensing Agent and the other from the Architect of the Capitol to the Department of the Interior should be quoted at this time as they verify amounts paid the artist and the length of time used in the actual painting of the Dome canopy.
From J. P. Usher, Secretary of Interior, dated Nov. 6, 1863.
“...$10,000, one fourth the entire cost of the work (for painting the canopy over the eye of the new dome of the Capitol in real fresco), has already been paid to Mr. Brumidi. I am of the opinion that the progress which has been made does not justify any further payments at present. You will therefore suspend any advances to Mr. Brumidi until further orders.”
From Thomas U. Walter, Architect U. S. Capitol, dated December 3, 1864.
“As the canopy for the picture over the eye of the new dome is ready for Mr. Brumidi and as he is now about to commence to work, I deem it proper to say that he has not received any payment on account of his contract since November 6, 1863, and that in the interim he has been occupied in perfecting the full-size cartoons, which are now ready for the work. I, therefore, respectfully recommend that payments to him be resumed in accordance with his contract and that they be continued as the work progresses until he shall have received the aggregate sum of $30,000, after which no further payments to be made until the work is completed and approved.”
In the Annual Report dated November 1, 1865, of Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol (1865-1902), we find reference to the completion of the canopy:
“The picture over the eye of the Dome is all painted in, but the artist is unwilling to have the scaffolding removed until the plastering is thoroughly dry and the picture toned. As it will at times be viewed by gas light, he wishes to have the opportunity of trying it by this light before dismissing it from his hands.”
The following report by Edward Clark written in longhand to the Secretary of the Interior and dated November 1, 1866, is preserved in the National Archives:
“The fresco picture over the eye of the Dome has been exposed to view by taking away the scaffolding. It is not, however, finished as the artist intends to soften down the harshness at the joinings of the plastering. He was under the impression that these imperfections would disappear when the surface became dry. He holds himself in readiness to do the proper toning and blending whenever the scaffolding is in place for the painting of vault of the Rotunda.
“I would call attention to the necessity of ornamenting the ‘Belt’ between the second and third cornices of the Rotunda. The original intention was to enrich this member in basso-relievo, but it is deemed advisable to have it painted in fresco in imitation of basso-relievo. Mr. Brumidi has submitted a design for its embellishment in this manner consisting of a series of natural pictures arranged in a chronological order. It is hoped this subject may receive attention, and that his design may be adapted or modified or other designs invited for this decoration from artists of acknowledged merit.”
Brumidi was sixty years old at the completion of this Dome Canopy. He had made 4,664 square feet of fresco in eleven months’ time on the inner surface of the Capitol’s Dome. This Canopy is 65 feet in diameter, has a concavity of 21 feet and displays its heroic figures as life-size from the floor of the Rotunda, 180 feet below.
The artist called this painting on the Dome canopy “The Apotheosis of Washington.” The outstanding figure is that of our first President attended by Liberty and Victory. Circling the center of the canopy are thirteen female figures in draperies of pastel beauty, bearing a ribbon-like banner which displays our treasured motto, “E Pluribus Unum.” The colors increase in brilliance and depth toward the outer borders of the canopy, blending finally into the intense hues of the six heroic groups about the base.
In these groups we find Minerva, Goddess of Arts and Sciences, as the center of her allegorical group; Ceres, of Agriculture; Mercury, messenger of the Gods, symbolizing Commerce; Vulcan, the God of Mechanics; Neptune, God of the Marine, and Armed Liberty with shield and sword, symbolizing War.
S. D. Wyeth says, “The fresco of Brumidi (on the canopy of the Dome) arrests the gaze as though the sky had opened and it were permitted to look into the beyond.” Wyeth, later, in referring to the same Dome canopy described it in this way: “Clouds of gold, azure and rose seem hanging there spanned by a rainbow, and, floating among them, forms of exquisite beauty. Grand mythological figures, symbolizing Force and Progress, appear there too, titanic, majestic—almost appalling with their great significance.”
A letter from Architect Clark to Artist Brumidi, dated September 18, 1865, should be quoted in order to appreciate Brumidi’s reply one day later:
“I learned in an interview with the Honorable Secretary of the Interior, this morning, that he was very anxious to have the picture over the eye of the Dome finished if possible by the meeting of Congress.
“You informed me when I first saw the work in relation to your July bill, that it was your intention to get it done by that time, and I was surprised to hear from you on Saturday morning last, that this was not likely to be done. You stated that you were unwilling to have the scaffoldings taken away before you had the advantage of trying it by gas light. In this you are certainly right, and I have to inform you that arrangements can be made to give you light whenever you need it.
“Please reply as to when it is likely you will have the picture done.”
Brumidi’s reply in which he tells of the final touches to this huge fresco is still preserved. In this letter the old artist’s concern for the proper finishing and lighting of his masterpiece is uppermost in his thought. The letter follows:
Washington, Sept. 19, 1865
Mr. Clark, Architect of the
Capitol Extension
Dear Sir:
Your letter of yesterday was received and you will do a great favor to me in referring to the Honorable Secretary of Interior, that about my painting in the Canopy of the Dome, I am working at present the last group, and for the next week I have finish to put in color every figure upon the fresh mortar.
That remains to do for the completion of it will require only five or six weeks, but must do it in the proper time, when the mortar will be perfectly dry, and the colors do not have any more changement.
This last work will cover the connections of the pieces of plaster, put up in sections at every day, and giving more union to the colors at the said junctions for to obtain the artistic effect.
It is the general rule in doing this kind of work to avoid the damp atmosphere of the winter season, but I will do this last finish as soon as the weather will permit, early in the spring, as always I have done in every other painting in real fresco in the Capitol and everywhere.
Also would be inadvisable to show that large painting without the proper light, because the windows of the dome are in the rear part of the painting and must be placed the reflectors already calculated in the Capitol’s original plan.
I hope when the appropriation will be passed by the Congress the said reflectors, and the gas apparatus will be completed, and I will be ready for my part.
I am always at work but I ask only the bill of August last, and you can assure the Honorable Secretary of the Interior that I never will claim any other bill after this, till my work will be entirely completed.
With respect I am
Your Obedient Servant
C. Brumidi
Apparently negotiations with Brumidi for painting the Dome fresco began with the letter from Tho. U. Walter, “architect of extension and new Dome,” dated August 18, 1862. Brumidi was authorized to proceed on March 11, 1863. On December 3, 1864, Tho. U. Walter wrote that the canopy for the picture over the eye of the Dome was ready for the artist and that Mr. Brumidi was “about to commence to work.” On November 1, 1865, Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol, reported that the picture over the eye of the Dome was all painted in but that Mr. Brumidi was unwilling to have the scaffolding removed until the plastering was thoroughly dry and the colors had no more “changement.”
On January 9, 1866, Edward Clark wrote the following letter to James Harlan, Secretary of the Interior:
“I have the honor to state that we are now making preparations to take down the scaffolding over the eye of the Dome to reveal Brumidi’s picture. It becomes necessary to have some canvas, or other strong material to place under the scaffolding to catch the dirt, etc., that would otherwise fall to the floor of the Rotunda which might cause inconvenience, perhaps accident.
“It is possible that some old sails might be borrowed from the Navy Yard for that purpose, and I therefore respectfully ask that you make a request to the Hon. Secretary of the Navy for the loan of such as may be necessary for this purpose which will be returned as soon as this work is done.”
Senate Appropriations Committee Rooms
On the walls of the Senate Military Committee Room—now one of the Committee Rooms on Senate Appropriations—are to be found five large frescoes, lunettes in shape, depicting scenes from American history. These pictures are filled with action and American atmosphere and could have been painted only by a lover of American liberty. The artist gave these titles to his five American lunettes: “Boston Massacre,” “Battle of Lexington,” “Death of General Wooster,” “Storming of Stony Point,” and “Washington at Valley Forge.”
The frescoed ceiling in this Senate Committee Room is conventional in design with victors’ wreaths, shields and other emblems of war predominating. Here we have such outstanding color combinations as to lead many Brumidi enthusiasts to vote this ceiling the Capitol’s best. In this room also are six outstanding panels, rich in color and different in design, displaying American arms of different periods. Never were guns, pistols, sabers, tomahawks, and flintlock rifles displayed with so much beauty and elegance—and the sword across the shield in the center is said to be a copy of one owned by Washington. (Keim attributes these panels to another Capitol artist.)
The north room used by the Senate Committee on Appropriations was decorated for the old Senate Committee on Naval Affairs. The design is that of a Pompeian fresco with marine gods and goddesses scattered about the ceiling and with ancient porticoes and antique vessels adorning the walls. Nine panels in oil with symbolic womanly figures in flowing robes against dark blue backgrounds to represent various attributes of the Navy finish the wall decorations.
On February 24, 1880, Senator Voorhees of Indiana referred to the Brumidi decorations of these two rooms in these words:
“Almost every committee-room announces to the eye by historical or allegorical paintings in fresco the duties to which it is dedicated. Who ever passed through the room of the Committee on Military Affairs without feeling that the very genius of heroism had left there its immortal inspirations? Who would mistake in after ages the use to which the room for the Committee on Naval Affairs had been devoted? The painter has told the whole story in a silent but in an undying language.”
An 1858 newspaper tells that the following statement was posted that year in the Senate Committee Room on Naval Affairs for the “edification of visitors”:
“Senate Committee on Naval Affairs—The decorative paintings of this room are a specimen of the manner in which the ancient Greeks and Romans ornamented their splendid buildings, some of which are still extant in the precious monuments of Pompeii and the baths of Titus. America with the sea divinities are painted on the ceiling in real fresco. These mythological figures are delineated agreeably to the poetical descriptions we have received of them, and they are Neptune, the god of the seas, Amphitrite, his wife, Aeolus keeping the winds chained to the rocks, Venus the daughter of the Sea, Oceanus with crampfish claws on his head, Thetis, his wife, and Nereus, the father of the Nereids, drawn by Glacus, and the Tritons by marine horses or swans, or else mounted as sea-monsters.”
Senate Reception Room
Brumidi decorated also the reception room of the Senate where constituents may still call upon their Senators—and admire the ceiling frescoes of the old artist. This room has a vaulted ceiling with two arches. The circular arch has a frescoed center of children and clouds with allegorical groupings about the center designed to represent Prudence, Justice, Temperance and Strength portrayed as beautiful madonnas with pink cheeked children. Four allegorical scenes in the groined arch hold forth Liberty, Plenty, War, and Peace, in the purity of other madonna-like groupings.
The walls of the Senate Reception Room have many empty and unfinished panels but the “elaborate ornaments and gilded mouldings around them” lend their own beauty to this room. The outstanding Brumidi work in the Senate Reception Room is a large centerpiece in oil on the south wall showing George Washington in consultation with Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. At either side, according to Brumidi, are “decorative figures in light and shade (chiaroscuro).” The old voucher of 1873, signed by Brumidi, and indicating the sum paid for this mural in the Senate Reception Room, follows:
“For approximate estimate for painting portraits of Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton on the walls of the Senate Reception Room—$500.00.”
Two of the Brumidi letters written in 1871 not only date the frescoes in the Senate Reception Room and those in the Military Committee Room of the Senate already described, but also name a lump sum paid the artist for at least a part of this work. These two letters written to the Architect of the Capitol Building and dated 1871 follow:
“In reply to your request about the completion of the decorative figures in light and shade (chiaroscuro) at the three panels in the reception room of the Senate according to that already painted in the last year.
“Also for three more panels in the walls of the Senate Military Committee room in real fresco with three battles of the American Revolution, and many other small paintings above a door and at the ceiling, for the completion of the ibid room, for the sum of $5,300.”
C. Brumidi
New York City
“I read in the Herald the adjournment of the Congress and an extra session of the Senate will meet again for the tenth of May.
“I think that in this present temporary recess, will be the time to give orders to the plasterer to finish the panels in the Reception Room, as the oil work will require the wall to be perfectly dry, and of course three or four weeks. Every plasterer can do it smooth like the others already painted.
“I am in attendance of your answer about it, and some information of Senator Wilson’s decision on the subject, for the fresco of this room, to prepare some sketch and cartoons.
“I am at work in St. Stephen’s Church and I wish to proceed with it till you will call me for work in the Senate or if you think necessary an excursion to fix this preparatory work or directions to the plasterer.”
C. Brumidi
The 1871 letter quoted above, written from New York, is the only reference in a Brumidi letter of the Brumidi file in the Architect’s office to any painting of Brumidi’s outside of Washington. It seems to have been proven, though, beyond a doubt that The Crucifixion in St. Stephen’s Church in New York is one of at least four such sacred paintings. The picture of Saint Peter and Saint Paul was painted in the Philadelphia Cathedral; The Holy Trinity was done in the Cathedral at Mexico City, and The First Communion of Saint Aloysius was placed above the altar in the old Saint Aloysius Church in Washington.
A study of the Saint Aloysius mural brought to light a letter written by Brumidi in Italian to Father Sestini of Georgetown University back in 1855. Father Sestini is said to have been such a close friend of Brumidi’s that the artist included the Father in his fresco of St. Aloysius. This letter to Father Sestini, translated by Father Geib of Georgetown University, is reproduced in its entirety, it being the only communication found from Brumidi to a Father in the Catholic Church. The letter to Father Sestini follows:
November 11, 1855
“I was displeased at not having been in my studios when you came to talk to me about the painting to be done in Baltimore. Concerning this, I shall be interested to know whether the Church has a flat ceiling, since in that case the painting could be easily executed on canvas, and later on, be placed against the said ceiling; this being the only way I can actually do anything in the service of the Society (of Jesus), since my contracted engagements for the Capitol do not let me move away from Washington, having also to offer my assistance to other artists of decorative painting and fresco, who work under my direction.
“If, therefore, there would be room for a picture (frame), as large as might be its size to be placed in the said way, I could paint it in tempera and produce the same appearance of a fresco. This is all I can promise in the circumstances in which now I am, and you would not attribute the objections already expressed to a lack of good will. Meanwhile, I profess myself entirely obliged for the favors I have at all times received from the Society (of Jesus).
“I repeat myself respectfully your most obliged servant,
Constantino Brumidi”
A certain anonymous letter from the Brumidi file in the Architect’s office at the Capitol should be quoted at this time. It was written on April 8, 1857, addressed to Mr. Walter, Architect of the Capitol, and shows Brumidi the target for more criticism. This crude and biased letter is quoted in full:
“The protegé and a kind of informer of Cap’t. Meigs, an Italian painter, Brumidi, paid $6 daily by Government, did three pictures for the churches of New York and in Georgetown and for which he received a good pay in hours and during the time which he had no right to dispose of.... His friend is paid too for the thing that he does not understand nor he attends to, yet all this is allowed and tolerated. What do you say about it? Shall we make public notice in papers or will you attend to it?”
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Room
Brumidi painted four large, bronze-colored medallions on the walls of this room, each medallion recording the profile of a noted chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
On the north wall is Henry Clay of Kentucky who served the Committee as chairman from 1834 to 1836. On the south wall is William S. Allen of Ohio, Committee chairman from 1845 to 1846. The east wall portrays Simon E. Cameron of Pennsylvania, who was chairman from 1871 to 1877, while on the west wall is Charles W. Sumner of Massachusetts, chairman from 1861 to 1871.
The voucher paying Brumidi for this work, dated June 21, 1874, reads as follows:
“For painting four medallion portraits in the Committee Room of Foreign Affairs, United States Senate, @ $50 each—$200.”
Senate District of Columbia Committee Rooms
Two of these Senate Annex rooms, the District of Columbia Committee Rooms, have unusual frescoed ceilings—that of the larger room being equal in workmanship to that of the President’s Room. Since this large Committee Room was originally set apart as a Senate Library the groupings were chosen with that in mind, for there the artist has represented Geography, History, Physics, and Telegraph. In each group is the Brumidi Madonna and the artist’s distinctive cherubs. The walls of this room were never finished but the ceiling colors are as brilliant today as though painted yesterday.
In the files of the Architect of the Capitol is to be found a collection of original Brumidi letters. Among these are two referring to the Library decorations, both written in 1858—one by a draughtsman, Johannes Oertel, to Mr. Brumidi, and one by Mr. Brumidi to Captain Meigs, then superintendent of Capitol construction. The old artist apparently bothered not to answer ridicule and art criticism but a “direct reproach” on the discharge of his duty did not go unchallenged. The two letters follow:
From Mr. Oertel to Mr. Brumidi:
“With much surprise I learned that last Saturday you had commenced to paint the ceiling at the Senate Library. This room, as you are aware, was assigned to me by Capt. Meigs. I had consequently made preparation to begin it, and have spent much time in doing so. The work is now useless, and my labor in vain.
“Common courtesy should have induced you to consult me before beginning yourself. I cannot conceive the propriety of your taking work out of my hands, to which by commission I was fairly entitled. I must regard it as an unjust interference with my rights, which rights I shall endeavor in the future to guard from invasion.”
From Mr. Brumidi to Capt. Meigs:
“On the 26th of April 1858, I received from Mr. Oertel the enclosed letter, which is very remarkable for the injurious sentiments it contains.
“I remember very well our conversation that you had invited a draughtsman to come to Washington to help me with my cartoons. Some days after, in the beginning of last year (1857), Mr. Oertel presented himself and told me he was the artist intended to assist me with my designs. I inquired of him if he could paint. He answered no, that he was only a draughtsman. In proof of this assertion he showed to me an oil painting of small dimension, representing the head of St. Paul. Such was his only experiment in coloring.
“After this I gave him the measure of six circles on the pilasters in the Navy Room, to make a corresponding number of portraits of celebrated men in the American Navy, intending to paint them myself. After that day I did not again see Mr. Oertel, because he had received orders from you to make the designs for the stained glass in the House of Representatives. In consequence of which order I could not have his services. I have never yet received the designs for the aforesaid portraits, therefore, I made them myself, also the cartoons for my other work, intending to execute them when the weather was favorable.
“Not being able to work in the room of the Committee of War, as it is at present occupied, nor in the ante-chamber of the Senate as there are many workmen employed there, I commenced in the Senate Library not having received any information that the frescoes there were intended for Mr. Oertel nor could I think that an artist who himself has confessed that he had no practice in painting could think of executing pictures in fresco which is undoubtedly the most difficult of all varieties of painting.
“If for about fifteen months Mr. Oertel had been under your immediate orders, I could not again employ him without a new order from you, notwithstanding I have only painted one panel in the Library, and if you desire that Mr. Oertel shall make his first experiment in fresco in the aforesaid room, there still remain three vacant panels.
“In everything concerning the work in the Capitol Extension, it is my duty to receive orders and whatsoever observations may be needed only from you. So that I pray you please to make known to Mr. Oertel that neither he nor any other person has authority to send me such an insolent letter, containing as it does a direct reproach on the discharge of my duty, and I consider he has done me a serious injury.”
Although this Senate Library was begun by Brumidi in 1858 it would seem that only one lunette was finished at that time and that negotiations for its completion were again resumed on August 12, 1866, when Mr. Brumidi wrote the following letter to Architect Clark itemizing the completion costs:
“...The three panels in the ceiling, painted in real fresco representing allegorical subjects, corresponding to the original plan, and to the other already painted by myself, for $1,500 each, making an amount of $4,500—and 500 dollars more for painting all the figures and ornaments in the same ceiling in correspondence with the others, making a total cost of $5,000.
“The enclosed account at the old price of daily wages was presented by me to put under consideration what would have been the cost of the work if it had been completed six years ago. The mentioned persons, Peruchi and Geier were employed expressly one to help me as an artist, and the other to serve me in preparing the cartoons, the colors, and to assist me in my private studio as well as in the Capitol, and they having nothing to do with the plasterer who fixes the mortar in the wall, always furnished by the government.”
Architect Clark’s reply a few days later was short and to the point, “I do not consider there is three times as much to do as has already been done.”
Brumidi painted in the Capitol Building throughout the entire war between the States. In the little ante-room of the Senate District of Columbia Committee Room, originally the office of the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate, is his only effort to picture that conflict. This small room has four allegorical designs painted about its upper walls and one large fresco in the center of the ceiling. This fresco is signed, “C. Brumidi, 1876,” and represents “Columbia Welcoming the South Back into the Union.”
On the east wall is “Secession”—the breaking of the fasces, and the rival products of the North and South; on the south wall is war and strife; on the north wall the implements of war are exchanged for those of peace, while on the west wall the fasces are again united with the words “E Pluribus Unum.”
These two Senate Committee Rooms present a great contrast in brilliancy of color. The somber tone of the smaller room might be due to its date of execution, it having been finished only four years before the artist’s death. The larger room is said to have had a bit of restoration at one time during the two restoration periods that some of the Brumidi frescoes have had in the Capitol.
Charles Ayer Whipple was employed in 1919 to restore some of the Brumidi paintings especially in the basement corridors in the Senate Annex. This artist is recorded to have said at that time, “The Brumidi decorations are second to none in the whole world.” In 1921 Charles E. Moberly also did some restoration of Brumidi paintings but his work was chiefly in the House Committee Room where a fire had marred the side walls, and in the Reception room of the Senate where a bomb explosion in the early days of World War I damaged the walls and ceiling.
Ground Floor Corridors Senate Extension
The Senate Appropriations Committee Rooms earlier referred to are entered from the West Corridor on the ground floor of the Senate Extension. Above the door leading into these Committee Rooms is the Brumidi fresco of Bellona, the Roman goddess of War, with her stacked guns, flag-draped cannon and silent drum and trumpets at her feet. This West Corridor with vaulted ceiling is elaborately decorated in 15th Century style, thought to have been inspired by the Loggia of Raphael in the Vatican at Rome, that portion of the Vatican at one time said to have been restored by Brumidi. In the Capitol’s West Corridor are studies of birds, butterflies and children. Among the humming birds, cardinals, bluejays, and robins are 13 exquisite landscapes and inimitable medallion profiles of John Hancock, Francis Hopkinson, Robert Livingston, Roger Sherman, John Jay, Charles Thompson, Charles Carroll and Robert Morris. In a special ceiling design are the twelve signs of the zodiac in fields of Pompeian blue.
Senator Voorhees made the following appreciative reference to Brumidi’s West Corridor designs:
“The poetry of the artist, if I may so express it, had also its field of display. To one who recalls the great forests of the West before they were swept away, the birds and the specimens of American animals with which he has adorned a portion of this Capitol must be a source of unceasing enjoyment. The birds especially are all there, from the humming-bird at an open flower to the bald eagle with his fiery eye and angry feathers. I have been told that the aged artist loved these birds as a father loves his children and that he often lingered in their midst as if a strong tie bound him to them.”
The North Corridor is equally as colorful as the West Corridor. Here we find painted on the walls, parrots and quail, lizards and chipmunks, squirrels and mice in their own habitat and color, midst every kind of flower and fruit imaginable. Children dance about the trailing arbutus, lilies of the valley, morning glories, columbine, bleeding hearts and peonies. Panels adorned with clusters and baskets of fruit—purple grapes, pineapples, peaches, plums, currants and cherries help to frame medallion profiles of Daniel Morgan, Jonathan Trumbull, Horatio Gates, Israel Putnam, Thomas Mifflin, Silas Deane, Richard Montgomery, Joseph Warren, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin.
In this corridor also are two large frescoes above other Committee room doors. “The Cession of Louisiana,” picturing Livingston, Monroe and Barbe-Marbois in the act of negotiating the Louisiana purchase, is at the west end of this corridor. At the east end of this corridor is “The Signing of the First Treaty of Peace with Great Britain in 1782” in which likenesses of Richard Oswald, John Adams, Henry Laurens, John Jay and Benjamin Franklin are portrayed.
A voucher, signed by Brumidi, and dated November 11, 1874, has been found referring to this treaty picture:
“For painting in Fresco over the entrance of the room of the Committee of Foreign Affairs, the picture of the Signing of the First Treaty with Great Britain—$600.”
On the upper walls of the Patent Corridor at the extreme east end of the North Corridor are large frescoes of Fulton and his invention on the Hudson, Fitch working on a steamboat model, and Franklin in his laboratory, while the ceiling displays many small designs of patents important to the American people. Roses of all colors, conventionalized or in tall graceful vases, predominate in this corridor decoration. Brumidi is reported to have said that his “Palisades of the Hudson” in the Robert Fulton fresco were not strong enough in perspective and that he hoped some day to have time to strengthen that portion of his painting.
A Brumidi voucher dated November 28, 1873, helps to verify the fact that the Fulton painting is a fresco:
“For painting in fresco the picture of Robert Fulton in the Senate wing, in the passage in front of the room of the Committee on Patents—$500.”
The Main Corridor on the ground floor of the Senate Extension is said to follow the Byzantine style of decoration with subdued backgrounds that display to perfection 14 more oval-shaped landscapes of marvelous depth and beauty. At the extreme north end of the corridor are the profile portraits of Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay, large frescoes of Justice Story and Chancellor Kent and a bust of Chancellor Livingstone executed in imitation sculpture.
Two vouchers signed by Brumidi and dated August 24, 1874, fix the date, price and style of painting in the north end of this main corridor:
“For painting bust in light and shade of Chancellor Livingston at north end of basement story—$100.”
“For painting in fresco the portraits of Justice Story and Chancellor Kent at north end of basement story—$400.”
There is also a South Corridor on this ground floor of the Senate Extension done in the same subdued Byzantine style with eight large studies of animals in oval frames painted in oil on the walls and eight other ovals of the same size displaying in each the United States shield.
Two facts concerning Brumidi disturb us at this point in some such way as Smith D. Fry evidently was disturbed back in 1912 when he wrote his “Story of the Capitol.” Mr. Fry apparently satisfied his own wonder in these words:
“Many people inquire how it was possible for Brumidi to accomplish such an enormous amount of art work. The great designer and decorator prepared his colors according to methods known only to himself. They were mixed or triturated by employees under Brumidi’s direction. Leslie and others covered the walls with backgrounds, under Brumidi’s direction. Other near artists made outlines, according to directions of the tireless worker. But all of the artistic work was finished by the hand of the matchless Brumidi himself. That the name of Brumidi and the story of his wonderful work have not been known to the American people is not due to lack of appreciation but to the fact that there has been no one with time and acquaintance with his work to tell the people about it.”
Capitol Rotunda
On the frieze of the Rotunda Brumidi did his last work in the Capitol Building. This frieze is a belt nine feet wide which circles the Rotunda 58 feet from the floor. The Rotunda is 300 feet in circumference. On October 1, 1877, the Architect of the Capitol gave the following report, “The belt of the Rotunda intended to be enriched with basso relievos is being embellished in real fresco representing in light and shadow events in our history arranged in chronological order, begining with the Landing of Columbus and ending with a period of our Revolutionary history to be decided later.”
According to Brumidi’s signed statement of 1874, earlier quoted, “That large frieze in the Rotunda was sketched by order of Captain Meigs before the war,” but the artist was 72 years old before he actually was allowed to begin painting the frieze in the difficult Rotunda location.
He had in mind fifteen historical scenes planned to cover fifteen divisions of the frieze and from his file of letters we know how desperately he worked to finish these frescoes before sickness should compel him to lay aside his brush. The following four short letters to the Architect of the Capitol during Brumidi’s last months show the heroic effort made by the artist to complete his frieze:
Washington, D. C., October 15, 1878
“I have returned at home, having improved enough and I am translating in large proportion the cartoon of Pocahontas, and if Monday the plasterer is ready to proceed with the panel of DeSoto I desire to go on in that work, if my health will permit me, as I hope.”
C. Brumidi
Washington, D. C., December 27, 1878
“In this very cold weather I am compelled to suspend the work in the Rotunda where
the heating is not enough to prevent the frost at the surface of the mortar, that does not remain soft long enough upon the wall for absorbing the colors till the piece of the day would be completed, causing injury to the work; for this reason I ask the permission to suspend the fresco work for some weeks until the weather will be not so cold.
“I am proceeding with the cartoon of The Landing of the Pilgrims, where I have no need of the laborer’s assistance.”
C. Brumidi
Orkney Springs, August 11, 1879
“In the month of July you agreed to my request to draw the cartoons in my studio.
“A short time before I was attacked by the asthma and finding no relief, was advised to leave the City by Dr. Thompson, and decided to come here. I suffered only during the night which was very fortunate as it permitted me to work in the day. I have completed three cartoons representing the treaty of William Penn and Settlement of New England which comprises two cartoons. I have brought one with me on which I work every day. I find the air a great benefit to me, the water also and expect to be able to continue the Fresco very soon.”
C. Brumidi
Washington, D. C., August 18, 1879
“Saturday 16th I returned in the city, and ready to proceed with the work in fresco (with your permission). Three cartoons are near completed. I am improved in the general health, that was the object of my trip and not for the pleasure.”
C. Brumidi
But this last task he set for himself was too great. Of the fifteen scenes Brumidi planned, he finished the following six: Landing of Columbus, 1492; Entry of Cortez into Mexico, 1521; Pizarro’s Conquest of Peru, 1533; Midnight Burial of DeSoto, 1541; Pocahontas saving John Smith, 1606; Landing of the Pilgrims, 1620.
The artist had the seventh scene, Penn’s Treaty with the Indians, 1682, more than half finished when he fell from the suspended chair from which he worked and was forced to hang by his arms from a ladder until workmen made the rescue. The last few months of his life he worked at his studio on the frieze cartoons. Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol, makes reference to the unfinished frieze in his Report of October 1, 1880. Said he at that time, “But little progress has been made on the frescoes of the belt in the Dome, owing to the illness and death of the late Constantino Brumidi. Philip Costaggini, an artist of acknowledged merit, educated in the same school as the former artist, is now engaged on these frescoes.” One year later, however, on October 1, 1881, Mr. Clark made the following report:
“Mr. Costaggini has painted in fresco on the belt of the Rotunda the “Settlement of New England,” “Oglethorpe and the Indians,” left unfinished by Mr. Brumidi, and he is now engaged on the “Reading of the Declaration of Independence.” It is proper to state here, that Mr. Brumidi made the designs for these sections only in small size and Mr. Costaggini has had to make the eight remaining full size cartoons.”
When Mr. Costaggini finished the work of executing the Brumidi designs on the Rotunda frieze he had space enough left to accommodate two compositions of his own choosing. Since his designs were never sanctioned by Congress, Mr. Costaggini died in 1907 leaving an unfinished frieze.
A third artist, Charles Ayer Whipple, was employed in 1918 at daily wages to restore some of Brumidi’s paintings on the walls of the Ground Floor Corridors at the Capitol and to make a sample painting on the unfinished frieze. This trial painting he called “The Spirit of 1917.” The Committee charged with final decisions concerning the frieze at that time decided against Whipple’s further effort.
In 1925 Mr. Whipple referred to his frieze painting in a letter to the Architect of the Capitol, a portion of which follows:
“As you know I painted a group of figures in the frieze with the permission of the Library Committee, to prove that I understood the ancient method of Fresco painting, that is, the method of Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel in Rome. The frieze is painted in that method and of course must be completed in the mode of the great Italian Master, that of “lime painting on wet plaster.” Mr. Whipple died in 1928. The frieze is still unfinished and still of current interest.
On August 17, 1950, the President of the United States signed a Joint Resolution, H. J. Res. 21, “To provide for the utilization of the unfinished portion of the historical frieze in the Rotunda of the Capitol to portray (1) the Civil War, (2) the Spanish-American War, and (3) the birth of aviation in the United States.”
Each new effort to finish the Rotunda Frieze is a testimony to the artist, Brumidi, and to his inimitable work. Should an artist well schooled in the Italian fresco process not be found to finish the frieze it is the author’s thought that the problem might be solved by adorning the blank portion of the Rotunda belt with a memorial inscription to Constantino Brumidi.